A Torontonian's ramblings on politics with especial attention to the local.

Sunday, June 10, 2007

Why MMP is Wrong for Ontario pt. 3

The next problem with the system is slightly technical but it is important so please bear with the explanation. The problem relates to how the seats are allocated. A party receives seats based not purely on the percentage of the vote it receives but instead based on its popularity in general minus its popularity locally. A party's allocation is determined by figuring out how many seats out of 129 it 'should' get and subtracting the number of seats won locally. A party that does well locally could get ZERO seats from the lists. This scenario is described by the assembly itself. Why is this a problem? Shall I list the ways?

It favours parties who do poorly at the local level and disadvantages parties with strong local organization. Parties with good candidates that voters actually vote for get nothing, parties that have poor candidates that could never win locally get seats.

Wasted votes. Fair vote and their ilk are always complaining about wasted votes. Under this system my vote would, in all likelihood, be wasted. As a Liberal in an NDP riding, I still have no say. I will admit this is not a big problem for me personally, but it is one of the reasons we are having this referendum. If the proposed system doesn't fix the problem, what's the point of tearing up our democratic traditions.

It discourages list candidates from trying to run (or at least very hard) locally. It is far easier for people like, oh I don't know, the leader of the Green Party, to get 3% of the popular vote than go door to door and try to win a riding.

It assures perpetual minority governments. In order to win a majority government a party would have to a) garner over 50% of the popular vote or b) win 65 out of 90 or 72% of first past the post seats. The Liberal landslide in 2003 won about 68% of the local seats and nowhere near 50% of the popular vote. I don't mind the odd minority government but having an election every 18 months for the rest of my life is not an appealing prospect.

It seems to place a higher respect for the list vote than the local vote.

4 comments:

I would like to introduce you to America's plan for a North American Union that will unite Mexico, the USA, and Canada. Our currencies will also be united into the "Amero."

Please visit author Daniel Estulin's web site for factual details about plans for One World Government. The North American Union is only one part of that plan.

http://www.danielestulin.com/?op=noticias&idioma=en

Also, please send donations to the few American media outlets that have chosen to cover Ron Paul, or give local media coverage to support 2008 US presidential candidate Ron Paul, the only one who opposes the North American Union. Learn more about Ron Paul at http://www.ronpaul2008.com

I would like to introduce you to the plan for a North American Union that will unite Mexico, the USA, and Canada. Our currencies will also be united into the "Amero." Visit http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=14965

Also visit author Daniel Estulin's web site for details about plans for One World Government. The North American Union is only one part of that plan.Go to http://www.danielestulin.com/?op=noticias&idioma=en

You may send donations to the few small American media outlets that have chosen to cover Ron Paul in the news, or give local media coverage to support 2008 US presidential candidate Ron Paul, the only one who opposes the North American Union. Learn more about Ron Paul at http://www.ronpaul2008.com

Anyone living outside the United States may not donate money directly to Ron Paul's campaign, since it against US law to do so. This does not prevent you from asking friends or family in the USA to donate, however -- on your behalf.

Help spread the word -- we are all in this together! What happens in America, affects the world. Thank you.

You clearly have no idea of the Way MMP Works. MMP works towards a Majority government EVERY TIME through COALITION Governments. We could see a Green Liberal, Liberal Conservative, NDP Liberal, Conservative NPD majority. The only way one party actually wins majority is if it holds over 50% of the vote. Otherwise, it's a SPLIT coalition Majority.

Your reasons are more heresay than logic. Why would a Candidate who is on the List try any less to help their party get elected than any other member? They still need votes to get in. And they still want as many of their members in as possible.